Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

STRANGE DIVORCE CASE

f By Telegraph — Press Association.) CHItrSTCHURCH, Last Night. An unusual type of divorce case was heard in the Supreme Court to-day, when William Cyrus Davie applied for a dissolution of his marriage with Elizabeth Anno Davie, on the ground of desertion. It wag stated that, the parties Were married at Sheffield ,England, in August, 1896. The petitioner was then twenty*two years of age, and the respondent fbt'ty. The respondent had £6OO A year. The petitioner {had a farm at Hawavdeii, New Zealand, and came to New Zealand by himself three months after his marriago to make a home, his wife coming out later. The parties lived together till October, 1898, when it was arranged that the mother should return to England and settle her son of seventeen .or eighteen years in business. After the respondent had been in England for a few months, she •wrote out that litigation had arisen, which had deprived her of a good deal of her money, and she asked her husband to go to England to help her. He was financially unable to do so. In 1900 the petitioner asked the respondent to come and live with him in New Zealand, and she refused, saying that it was impbssible. The desertion dated from then. 'Shortly after,, the son wrote, saying that he 'nul-asked his mother to come to New Zealand, and asking if the petitioner could 2'ive him work on his farm. Th'f petitioner replied, asking his wife to ramo to New- Zealand,' but refusing to give the son work. The correspondence then ceased till 1908, when the respondent wrote asking for £2o, which the petitioner forwarded. Counsel for th« respondent said Mrs Davie went to England, with her husband's full consent, to transact! important business. She was served with a writ in connection with Chancery proceedings* in 1900, and 'vjis thus umble to return to New Zealand «t that tim<\ " The hushnnd forwarded an ultimatum in 1900 that she should feme back'to New Zealand, therefore her faihve to comply «ith the request could not be considered.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19120830.2.19.10

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10707, 30 August 1912, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
345

STRANGE DIVORCE CASE Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10707, 30 August 1912, Page 5

STRANGE DIVORCE CASE Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10707, 30 August 1912, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert